Lee Hoos

[wilks_bfc]

Lee Hoos has managed to outdo retainergate and is now feeling the wrath of QPR fans on Twitter today after he has told them that in order for them to have a benefit game for Stan Bowles, the fans must come up with upfront costs of £37k.

What some fans are having issue with us that they were payin Sandro £60k per week until recently along with the fact that the club sell merchandise featuring the club legend.

[Bordeauxclaret]

Really connects with the fans does Lee.

[Sidney1st]

I wonder if he has a hat full of stupid ideas and and just draws them at random when he feels bored?

[bodge]

Holloway used his presser today to tell the QPR fans to get ready for a period of austerity, they've got rid of Sandro and Chery and brought in Lua-Lua on loan.

Reality time for the previously big spending West Londoners, funny how you don't hear from Tony Fernandes these days.

[Woodleyclaret]

When are the revenue calling to examine QPRs books. Debts of £165m were mentioned if they went down.Or have they got Harry's dog to do the books.

[Spijed]

With regards to his time here, I'm not sure he would have got his ideas through without the consent of our board. They are as guilty of the ticketing mistakes as he is.

[Jimmymaccer]

Perhaps QPR will play in a gold foil coloured kit next season......

[what_no_pies]

The reasoning behind his ticketing ideas was perfectly sound.

Dynamic pricing through the ground (best seats should cost more than corners) and reward loyalty.

Even our most cynical supporter would have to agree with both ideas. Sadly the execution was terrible.

Had it been rolled out with a little more planning (or any planning at all) I believe it'd have been much better received.

[Sidney1st]

When are the revenue calling to examine QPRs books. Debts of £165m were mentioned if they went down.Or have they got Harry's dog to do the books.

The owners 'wiped' most of it out, in an effort to beat FFP I think I read somewhere, but it didn't quite work.
It got a bit messy then suddenly went all quiet.

[ontario claret]

It's a race to the bottom between Wovers and the Hoops!!!!! Who's going to get there first?

[Royboyclaret]

"The owners 'wiped' most of it out, in an effort to beat FFP I think I read somewhere, but it didn't quite work.
It got a bit messy then suddenly went all quiet."


Sidney.......they wrote off £64million of the overall debt and incredibly thought they could get away with a double-entry to the P/L account thereby reducing the operating loss to a figure which meant they just complied with FFP.

Of course, because they were promoted they were correctly hit with a FFP fine of £58million. The fine was contested but the hearing is later this year when my information is they will accept a 'settlement fine' of slightly less than the original figure.

Quite where that leaves them in their current attempt at 'austerity' is anyone's guess but they either pay or lose their membership of the FL.

[Sidney1st]

Cheers Roy, I knew they'd tried something.

[ClaretTony]

I spent a lot of hours in meetings with him over the three to four years he was here. Very engaging if you put forward anything he agreed with but very aggressively defensive if he didn't agree.

Someone once said to me: "He doesn't get Burnley", and I think that's absolutely spot on.

[Colburn_Claret]

To be fair he's a yank, I don't think he gets 'soccer'.

[Royboyclaret]

The problem was that, because they were promoted, they were at that point outside the jurisdiction of the FL who were unable to recover the fine being outmuscled by the PL.

In truth after relegation, and still no payment, their registration back into the FL should have been refused but was put on hold due to the hearing. Shaun Harvey, CEO at the FL was somewhat undermined at that time but it seems QPR will now pay a substantial fine which may put their very future in jeopardy.

[CharlieinNewMexico]

To be fair he's a yank, I don't think he gets 'soccer'.

I logged in specially just to go "yawwwwwwwnnn" at that one Colburn. Nothing like trotting out the old stereotypes of 25 years ago, eh

[Tuddybfc]

The reasoning behind his ticketing ideas was perfectly sound.

Dynamic pricing through the ground (best seats should cost more than corners) and reward loyalty.

Even our most cynical supporter would have to agree with both ideas. Sadly the execution was terrible.

Had it been rolled out with a little more planning (or any planning at all) I believe it'd have been much better received.

Didn't reward loyalty for away supporters, hardly fair giving the same loyalty to people going to say Bolton away as Brighton on a Saturday lunchtime

[aggi]

Didn't the numbers show that the retainer worked?

Sounds like the QPR owners rate him, he's been promoted http://www.westlondonsport.com/qpr/qpr- ... e-04012016" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Enola Gay]

To be fair he's a yank, I don't think he gets 'soccer'.

It's nice of you to trot that stereotype out, given that it's too lazy and feeble these days to get out on its own.

[what_no_pies]

Didn't reward loyalty for away supporters, hardly fair giving the same loyalty to people going to say Bolton away as Brighton on a Saturday lunchtime

Priced according to commitment and loyalty as he wanted to introduce couldn't ever impact away tickets as BFC don't set prices for away games. Nor do BFC profit the same way as they do for home ticket sales - of course they incentivise season ticket holders and regular home attendees, it's good business sense.

The club does have the Clarets points scheme which allows those that purchase tickets regularly to get priority purchase periods for away games anyway but that's got nothing to do with Hoos - it's the same loyalty scheme as was already in place before his tenure as far as I can tell. Season ticket holders are rightly the best served by such schemes.

Why do you think BFC should prioritise people that choose to spend their money elsewhere? Seems completely bonkers logic to me.

[Woodleyclaret]

Best thing he did at Burnley was to leave.Some disgraceful give away sales of our top players we conducted under his watch

[9thMay1987]

His number 1 brief from the board, at the time, was cut the losses to zero.

This he did very successfully and Mr Dyche added the cherry on top with promotion.

He then tried to push up profits with the retainer scheme which was a mistake where he failed to heed the warnings.

His CV of promotion and a profit (before promotional bonuses) must make him a stand out candidate for CEO of any football club.

[ClaretTony]

Some disgraceful give away sales of our top players we conducted under his watch

I'd be interested to know which players you considered were give away sales.

[Quickenthetempo]

He didn't reward current fans he overcharged new fans/customers to make it out he was rewarding the already loyal supporters.

[ClaretTony]

He didn't reward current fans he overcharged new fans/customers to make it out he was rewarding the already loyal supporters.

A friend of mine had been a season ticket holder for years but had to give it up because of losing his job. Once back in work he renewed the following season but had to pay a premium as a new season ticket holder. That's one thing that's been removed now.

[ontario claret]

I think that he's primarily a money man who just happens to be in the football business.

[ClaretTony]

I think that he's primarily a money man who just happens to be in the football business.

He was a lawyer who ended up working for Mohamed Al-Fyed at Harrod's. Al-Fyed then moved him to Fulham.

[ontario claret]

Well, he might be a lawyer by training, but he's now primarily a money man. If he worked for Al-Fyed, he definitely learned something about it.